Detailed Lebanese & Lebanese Related LCCC English New Bulletin For October 19/2018
Compiled & Prepared by: Elias Bejjani

The Bulletin's Link on the lccc Site
http://data.eliasbejjaninews.com/newselias18/english.october19.18.htm

News Bulletin Achieves Since 2006
Click Here to enter the LCCC Arabic/English news bulletins Achieves since 2006

The strategic and spiritual weight of Saudi Arabia
Fahad Suleiman Shoqiran/Al Arabiya/October 18/18
American-Saudi relations were built as part of a legacy of interests after World War II. Ever since the meeting between Roosevelt and King Abdulaziz, and the Eisenhower Doctrine with King Saud all the way through to the several agreements and consecutive meetings with crown princes and kings, the relations were not only based on cultural ties, religious dimensions or geographic locations. They revolved around interests; the more they were strengthened, the more solid ties were, and when they begin to fade, they would be in danger. In his interview with Bloomberg, Prince Mohammed bin Salman noted that the relationship with Trump is built on work. Obama’s agenda that worked against Saudi Arabia was not effective as Saudi Arabia maintained its influence and strategic work and path in the region. The kingdom’s strategic weight comes from taking the lead in terms of its ability to provide the world with oil, look after the Two Holy Mosques and having a spiritual power, which millions of Muslims feel around the world. Everyone knows what happened and what caused the disturbance in the region after Obama turned away from Saudi Arabia and preferred to negotiate with Iran. This is when the disaster happened
Targeting Saudi Arabia
Following the disappearance of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, a front of “adversaries” was formed to attack Saudi Arabia without waiting for the results of the investigation. It’s a political attack led by Qatar along with a group of leftists, nationalists, Brotherhood remnants and imbecile figures via news segments and programs. The adversaries colluded to carry out this attack as they saw in the disappearance of Jamal an opportunity to direct their arrows at Saudi Arabia. They thus employed their full potential to serve personal vendetta aims and launch a political war.
The state of Qatar which is outcast by countries whose population is more than 150 million in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE and Bahrain is suffering from a severe geographic crisis and it’s politically suffocated, so it wanted to avenge via all means possible even if it’s through lies and fabrications.
The Khashoggi case has created a tense media atmosphere as reporters are asking Trump about him whenever they get the chance regardless of the occasion they are covering. Saudi Arabia has overcome bigger crises and it has the ability to confront threats via its capabilities and alliances in the region as it’s not an incapable country.
Close US relations
Everyone knows what happened and what caused the disturbance in the region after Obama turned away from Saudi Arabia and preferred to negotiate with Iran. This is when the disaster happened, and the region with its history of cultural convergence between nations via the Mediterranean area turned into fronts of evil, terrorism and ethnic and religious massacres. Pompeo’s visit to Riyadh gave the relation between the two countries positive vibes. Pompeo is one of the prominent wise men in the current American administration. He along with the king and the crown prince can renew the formulas of interests and strategic convergence in the region. There is a need to coordinate in Yemen and Syria, the nature of the Turkish role, the war on terrorism and leading the Islamic world towards a renewed religious rhetoric. These are tasks which only Saudi Arabia with its political, geographic and spiritual weight can assume.
Pompeo’s remarks confirmed there’s a Saudi political insistence to investigate Khashoggi’s case and King Salman ordered the public prosecutor to conduct an internal probe into the Khashoggi disappearance. This reflects exceptional seriousness and quick actions to find answers to all mysteries. Saudi Arabia has its long history, it defended its existence against the forces of evil and the rounds of wars lasted for 300 years. It can carry out its roles towards its people and surroundings without blackmail or beneficence from anyone.

Israel’s war planes unlikely to be deterred by Syrian missiles
محمد شبارو:  من غير المحتمل أن تردع الصواريخ السورية غارات الطائرات الإسرائيلية
Mohamed Chebaro/Arab News/October 17, 2018
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/68219/mohamed-chebaro-israels-war-planes-unlikely-to-be-deterred-by-syrian-missiles-%D9%85%D8%AD%D9%85%D8%AF-%D8%B4%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B1%D9%88-%D9%85%D9%86-%D8%BA%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85/
The Russian S-300 surface-to-air missile system that is set to be delivered to Syria — whether it will be operated by the Syrian military loyal to President Bashar Assad or by his Russian allies — is unlikely to alter much the free hand Israel has enjoyed in the skies above Syria and Lebanon, at least for the foreseeable future.
The delivery of the S-300 system, if it happens, will no doubt give the Syrian military an advanced weapon system that could check Israeli supremacy, but it will not be a game-changer that will push Tel Aviv to cease its targeting of Iranian and Hezbollah military assets that are deemed threats to Israel’s security.
In the seven years since the start of the popular rebellion against Assad and his family’s rule, Israel has not attempted to interfere or even encourage the removal of Assad. Israel has always believed that Assad’s rule in Syria should continue so that it can maintain the stability of its northern border. Some even believe that Israel has lobbied through its international diplomatic channels to veto the removal of the weakened Assad regime, and that all Tel Aviv is concerned with is that the regime remain weak and that Assad’s boisterous Iranian and Lebanese allies are banned from having high-tech missile technology on Syrian soil.
Since the Russian deployment in Syria in September 2015 to prop up the Assad regime’s forces, the Israeli air force has carried out numerous attacks targeting Hezbollah militia commanders, ammunition dumps, Iranian missile development infrastructure, Iranian drone launch sites, and Iranian and Hezbollah missile convoys in Syria and Lebanon.
In the past three years, military air traffic control in Syria has never been this busy, but it has been extremely well managed thanks to Russian liaison and coordination efforts between all parties. Israeli war planes had unhindered access to strike 200 targets in 2018 alone, while the international coalition against Daesh flew tens of thousands of sorties and struck hundreds of Daesh positions. The Russian, Iraqi and Syrian air forces have also carried out thousands of sorties, and Iran has launched dozens of drones and long-range missile attacks without any major incident.
But the controversial downing of a Russian military Ilyushin Il-20 plane with 15 personnel on board — most probably by a Syrian military shoulder-operated surface-to-air missile — in September somewhat spoiled the seamless Israeli-Russian understanding over Syria. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is waiting for his next meeting with President Vladimir Putin to clear the air, as Israel has again rejected Moscow’s attempt to hold it responsible for the deaths of the Russian servicemen. Israel has disputed the Russian findings and says its jets were back in Israeli airspace when the Russian plane was hit.
For Israel, it is evident that it wants to continue hitting Iranian and Hezbollah targets in neighboring Syria despite Moscow’s decision to equip Damascus with the S-300 system. The S-300 could only limit Tel Aviv’s free hand over Syria if Russia also supplies the latest radars, advanced counter measures systems and friendly and enemy plane identification software at the heart of the incident that saw the Ilyushin plane downed by the Syrian military.
The S-300 is, above all, a politically sensitive weapon system and a strategic balance of power breaker.
History has shown that, even at the height of the Arab-Israeli conflict in the 1960s and 70s, Moscow refrained from supplying its Arab allies with technology that threatened Israel’s strategic supremacy, and this sensitive Russian balancing act continues today.
The S-300 is one of a series of highly capable varieties of long-range surface-to-air missile first developed and deployed in the USSR in 1979, and later modified and upgraded by the Russian armed forces. As well as targeting aircraft, the fully mobile units also have the capacity to engage ballistic missiles. But the S-300 is, above all, a politically sensitive weapon system and a strategic balance of power breaker, hence the long Russian hesitation to supply it to Damascus and Tehran.
Yet the bottom line still depends on Putin. Though his minister of defense has been keen to protect Russian forces in Syria with electronic warfare systems, as well as equipping Assad’s forces with tracking and guidance systems to prevent future mishaps, I tend to believe that the status quo will not be affected. The Israeli-Russian hotlines established in 2015 will continue to be the medium to prevent accidents, while Israeli war planes will be allowed to monitor and act unhindered against what they consider to be enemy targets in Syria.
Putin’s Russia has mastered the act of balancing its interests with those of its allies, such as Turkey, Iran and Israel. Putin succeeded in pushing the Iranians back more than 100 kilometers from the occupied Golan Heights border area at the request of Tel Aviv. He also turned his back on his Iranian allies many times as Moscow failed to supply Tehran with the S-400 system — a more advanced version of the S-300. The Russian military stood idle as Israeli war planes neutralized Iranian weapon systems destined for Hezbollah, assassinated key Iranian and Hezbollah field commanders, and removed Iran’s advanced drone operation bases in Syria without the slightest reaction from Tehran or its allies.
In Syria’s many wars, the modus vivendi governing the relations of all the militaries involved is likely to continue. The only minor adjustments may be for Israel should Putin decide to cross the strategic threshold and arm Assad’s military with sensitive weapons that could make its operations more problematic, but not impossible, in the busy skies above Syria.
*Mohamed Chebaro is a British-Lebanese journalist with more than 25 years’ experience covering war, terrorism, defense, current affairs and diplomacy. He is also a media consultant and trainer.

Five things to know about 'MBS,' Saudi Arabia's crown prince
Tal Axelrod/The Hill/October 18/18
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has been caught in an international firestorm over his alleged involvement in the disappearance and suspected death of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, who was last seen entering the Saudi consulate in Istanbul earlier this month.
Khashoggi was a Saudi-born U.S. resident who wrote for The Washington Post and was critical of the Saudi royal court. The New York Times reported that multiple suspects in Khashoggi’s disappearance had close ties to the crown prince.
Khashoggi’s suspected death is arguably the biggest international crisis Salman, who is often referred to by the nickname "MBS," has faced during his time in the Saudi royal court. Salman, who is a grandson of Saudi Arabia’s founder and first monarch, Ibn Saud, has risen through the ranks of the Saudi government in recent years to become the nation's most prominent figure on the world stage.
He started as head of the Crown Prince’s Court in 2013 after his father was appointed the crown prince. When his father became king in 2015, Salman was appointed minister of defense and then deputy crown prince later that year. Salman replaced his cousin Mohammed bin Nayef as crown prince, the second in line to the king, in June 2017.
Here are five things to know about the leader known as MBS.
He has overseen a crackdown on dissent
While ostensibly opening up the Saudi economy and society at large, MBS directed a swift crackdown on dissent that reached the highest echelons of power.
Over a dozen senior Saudi officials, including business leaders and even competing members of the royal family, were locked inside the Ritz-Carlton hotel in Riyadh in what the royal court claimed was an anti-corruption sweep.
Among those arrested were billionaire businessman Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, the former head of the royal court Khaled Al-Tuwaijri and Saudi media mogul Waleed Al-Ibrahim.
Amnesty International also reported that in August two women activists were thrown in jail for speaking out against the government.
MBS, 33, is “someone who sees himself as a transformational, historical figure who’s going to change Saudi Arabia," according to Shadi Hamid, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution's Center for Middle East Policy. "Oftentimes when you have these authoritarian modernizers, they have little tolerance for dissent…because they want to make change in their own image. The reformer narrative can coexist with this other side of MBS instead of being seen as opposed or mutually exclusive."
Khashoggi himself was openly supportive of MBS’s reforms, but the crackdown on dissent eventually led him to flee the country.
He has cultivated an image as a reformer
MBS launched an ambitious reform initiative called "Vision 2030" in 2016, which involved bringing economic and social change to Saudi Arabia. The plan called for increasing non-oil revenue in the kingdom by over $260 billion by 2030 and creating “the world’s largest sovereign wealth fund.”
“We commit ourselves to providing world-class government services which effectively and efficiently meet the needs of our citizens. Together we will continue building a better country, fulfilling our dream of prosperity and unlocking the talent, potential, and dedication of our young men and women,” MBS wrote in launching "Vision 2030."
Subsequent reforms included allowing women to drive cars and enter sports stadiums for the first time in the kingdom’s history, as well as opening movie theaters.
The reforms were welcomed in the West. The White House issued a statement praising the decision to lift the driving ban for women, and members of the media heaped praise on the young ruler's apparent desire to liberalize at least some aspects of Saudi Arabia's rigidly conservative society. In March, Salman toured the U.S. and sat down for interviews with multiple news outlets.
But the Khashoggi crisis could impact that image.
“No one can talk about MBS as a positive force for change in Saudi Arabia anymore with a straight face. It’s done,” Hamid told The Hill.
“He’ll survive, but part of his image was building ties beyond governments and building relationships with tech companies and entertainment agencies and really having this charm offensive, so it will change some of that for him for sure,” he added.
He's a key ally of the Trump administration
MBS has close ties with members of the Trump administration and is seen by Washington as vital to its efforts to counter Iran and combat terrorism in the Middle East.
The crown prince has held long meetings with Jared Kushner, Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser, who reportedly played a significant role in promoting MBS as a potential partner in the region.
The president has also praised MBS, saying, “We’ve become very good friends over a very short period of time,” at an Oval Office meeting with the crown prince in March and touting an arms sale that Trump says will bring billions of dollars into the US.
Trump has evoked that arms sale in public comments since the recent crisis, as he remains hesitant to punish Saudi Arabia for its possible involvement in Khashoggi's disappearance.
Trump told Fox News on Wednesday that "We need Saudi Arabia," arguing that pulling back from the arms sale would hurt American workers.
MBS has also overseen an aggressive foreign policy in the region, including launching a military campaign against Iranian-backed rebels in Yemen while he was defense minister; directing support toward rebel groups in Syria fighting Syrian President Bashar Assad; and organizing a multinational blockade of Qatar over its government’s purported ties to terrorist groups.
The Trump administration has been criticized heavily over its supplying of weapons and military training to Saudi Arabia-backed forces in Yemen, which has resulted in massive civilian causalities and a humanitarian crisis in the Arab world’s poorest nation.
MBS also called on the White House to keep troops in Syria despite Trump’s stated desire to withdraw, telling Time in March, “We believe American troops should stay for at least the mid-term, if not the long-term.”
The blockade surrounding Qatar has also forced the White House and State Department to walk a delicate tight rope, as it seeks to avoid a confrontation with one of its closest allies in the Middle East while protecting its interests in Qatar, which houses the largest US military base in the region. Qatar has denied any connections to terrorist groups.
Saudi Arabia plays a crucial role in the Trump administration’s signature Middle East policy: countering Iranian influence in the region. In that effort, MBS has proven to be a staunch ally, citing Iran in his campaigns in Yemen and Syria.
“Trump does see Saudi Arabia as perhaps even central to his broader Middle East strategy, and that includes isolating Iran,” Hamid said.
“Human rights abuses don’t figure prominently in how he looks at things. He seems to really want to find a way to move. I think it should strain the relationship but I’m not sure it will in any lasting way, at least with Trump himself,” he added.
He's facing his biggest crisis on the world stage so far
MBS has faced international scandals during his time on the royal court. It was reported that the crown prince was heavily involved in a plot to possibly kidnap Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri in 2017.
Hariri abruptly announced his resignation in November during a trip to Saudi Arabia, prompting speculation that the Saudis had coaxed him to travel away from Lebanon and then detain him. Parties in each of the countries said the other nation had declared war.
Hariri eventually returned to Lebanon after widespread criticism of Saudi Arabia and suspended, then rescinded, the resignation.
And yet, despite questions surrounding the incident with Hariri, as well as the anti-corruption campaign and the brutality of the war in Yemen, tensions did not boil over between Saudi Arabia and its Western allies until Khashoggi was reported missing.
Politicians on Capitol Hill were quick to condemn Saudi Arabia and MBS over the Khashoggi disappearance, with Trump ally Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) saying the US should “sanction the hell” out of Saudi Arabia and that MBS has “got to go.”
“This story is different because it brings all the other issues to the fore. I’m not seeing it as one isolated incident, I’m seeing it as a culmination and the discontent with MBS has been building in Washington and this is the one thing that has brought it all out,” Hamid told The Hill.
“One thing that’s different about this is that it’s so brazen and it seem disrespectful to the US…It’s one thing to deal with unsavory actors, which the US has done for decades. It’s another thing to have it shoved in your face when one of your allies does something as crazy and reckless as this,” he added.
He's likely to survive politically
The Khashoggi scandal has led observers to question what will become of MBS now that he's no longer seen as the reformer he once was.
“I don’t see how Saudi Arabia completely recovers from this. There might be some reversion to business as usual, but because this case has gotten so much public and international attention…that it could have permanent effects on the image of Saudi Arabia and MBS in particular,” Hamid said.
However, Saudi Arabia, with its massive oil reserves and influence in the Middle East, still holds significant sway among world powers and is unlikely to become a pariah state, as evidenced by Trump’s recent defense of MBS.
As the crown prince, MBS is officially second in power and answerable only to King Salman himself. Hamid predicts that the damage from the Khashoggi scandal will be contained to MBS’s image, while his stature within the royal court will not take a hit. He’ll remain an international figure because “he’s going to be Saudi Arabia’s leader, which means he will matter. And there’s nothing really anyone can do about that," Hamid said.
https://thehill.com/policy/international/middle-east-north-africa/411894-five-things-to-know-about-mohammed-bin-salman

Opportunistic Iran regime supports Al-Qaeda-linked terror group
الدكتور ماجد ربيزاده: نظام إيران الوصولي يدعم جماعة الشباب الصومالية الإرهابية المرتبطة بالقاعدة
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Arab News/October 18/18
http://eliasbejjaninews.com/archives/68235/dr-majid-rafizadeh-opportunistic-iran-regime-supports-al-qaeda-linked-terror-group-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AF%D9%83%D8%AA%D9%88%D8%B1-%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%AC%D8%AF-%D8%B1%D8%A8%D9%8A%D8%B2%D8%A7%D8%AF%D9%87/
UN experts have recently shared a report with the organization’s Security Council that describes in detail how the Iranian regime has been cooperating with and assisting an Al-Qaeda-affiliated terror group.
The as-yet-unpublished report, which has been seen by the Associated Press, sheds light on a sophisticated process through which the Iranian regime has been facilitating the path for the Al-Qaeda-linked militant group Al-Shabab to circumvent UN sanctions and make millions of dollars of profit every year. The process involves using false Comoros, Cote d’Ivoire and Ghana certificates of origin to import sanctioned Somali charcoal, before repackaging it from typical blue-green bags into white bags labeled as "Product of Iran," according to the report.
This development highlights the fact that Iran’s political establishment does not hesitate in assisting terror and militia groups by exploiting the legitimacy granted to it by the UN. In addition, the theocratic establishment has been taking advantage of the concept of sovereignty by permitting the Al-Qaeda-linked militant group to use its lands and ports as transit points. The Iranian regime has also been making its ships accessible as cover for such smuggling.
Mostly likely, the two major players that have been facilitating these illicit activities are Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and its elite wing, the Quds Force, which carries out operations in foreign nations. The US has been considering officially designating the IRGC as a terror group. The Liberal Party of Canada has also been calling on its government to label the IRGC as a terrorist organization. Former Liberal Foreign Affairs critic Bob Rae hit the nail on the head when he said: “The IRGC of Iran is a paramilitary organization involved in domestic repression, military operations and support for terrorist networks, and yet Canada has not yet listed the IRGC as a terrorist organization. That must change.”
This is not the first time that a UN report has revealed a link between Iran and militia groups. Earlier this year, a UN paper conclusively proved a connection between Iran’s short-range ballistic missiles and the Houthis.
With regards to Al-Shabab, the UN sanctions were aimed at choking off the flow of money to this Somali militant group. Nevertheless, Iran is most likely cognizant of the fact that a continuous flow of money is a necessity for terror and militia groups when it comes to pursuing terrorist activities. Last year, Al-Shabab claimed responsibility for carrying out one of the country’s largest and deadliest terrorist attacks; a truck bombing in Mogadishu, the capital , which killed at least 500 people.
Facilitating Al-Shabab’s illegal charcoal trade does not only provide the sole means for the group to commit terrorist activities; it also brings about severe environmental and economic repercussions as it disrupts the domestic market. As Deputy Prime Minister Mahdi Mohammed Guled stated: “We need cooperation to implement the UN Security Council (sanctions) and ensure the environmental, economic and human losses that happen because of the illegal charcoal trade are curbed.”
For the Iranian regime, as long as there are common ideological interests — such as promoting terrorism, chaos and instability — religious differences will not be considered a priority. That is why a trove of 470,000 documents previously released by the CIA revealed close ties between Al-Qaeda and the Iranian regime dating back many years.
Another important issue to highlight is the link between the Iranian regime and Sunni terror groups. Since Iran’s ruling theocracy has been widely linked to Shiite militias and terror groups, some policy analysts and scholars have been surprised that Tehran would cooperate with Sunni extremists such as Al-Qaeda and its affiliates. What should be surprising is that some still do not appear to grasp the nature of the long and close relationship between Iran and such fundamentalist groups.
For the Iranian regime, as long as there are common ideological interests — such as promoting terrorism, chaos and instability — religious differences will not be considered a priority. That is why a trove of 470,000 documents previously released by the CIA revealed close ties between Al-Qaeda and the Iranian regime dating back many years.
Tehran views militant and terror groups such as Al-Shabab through the prism of political opportunism. From the Iranian leaders’ perspective, extremists can form invaluable non-state terrorist groups that could accomplish Iran’s two main revolutionary principles: Anti-Americanism and undermining Saudi Arabia’s interests in the region.
In other words, the Sunni-Shiite division between Al-Qaeda-linked groups, such as Al-Shabab, and the Iranian regime was never an issue for Tehran as long as the terrorist groups could help it accomplish its revolutionary principles, destabilize the region, and achieve the mullahs’ regional ambitions.
Finally, the Iranian regime ought to be held liable for assisting Al-Shabab financially and helping the militant group skirt UN sanctions. By facilitating the flow of money to Al-Shabab, the Islamic Republic is contributing to those terrorist attacks carried out by the group, which have resulted in hundreds of innocent people losing their lives. The Iranian leaders engaged in such smuggling and illicit activities must be sanctioned.
If it were not for Iran’s ongoing assistance, Al-Shabab would be less likely to have the opportunity to continue expanding its power and commit some of the deadliest terrorist attacks in the world.
*Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a Harvard-educated Iranian-American political scientist. He is a leading expert on Iran and US foreign policy, a businessman and president of the International American Council. Twitter: @Dr_Rafizadeh

The Chilling Effect of the Khashoggi Case: A Trigger for Arabs Living in Fear
Tuqa Nusairat/Atlantic Council/October 18/18
Since the apparent murder-disappearance of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi on October 2, analysts have focused primarily on the implications for US-Saudi relations and the future of Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman’s vision for domestic reforms. Absent from policy discussions and analysis is the impact of brutally silencing a mild critic of an autocratic regime on the psyche of 450 million Arabs, most of whom still live under regimes that severely limit freedoms of speech, protest, political participation, and religion.
Yet just as the recent testimony of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford was a trigger for survivors of sexual assault, the murder-disappearance of Khashoggi is a trigger for the millions of Arabs who are survivors of autocratic regimes. For them, the unapologetic silencing of a citizen who critiqued his country’s policies is a reminder of the reality they face on a daily basis: the inability to practice the most basic forms of expression, let alone engage in nonviolent protest or direct criticism of their rulers and government.
Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump instead highlighted the importance of US weapon sales to Saudi Arabia, which would total approximately $110 billion over the next ten years for US defense companies. He made it clear that if Congress were to impose sanctions, Saudi Arabia could easily turn to China and Russia, dealing the United States a significant economic blow. Others have noted, with evidence mounting of the Kingdom’s responsibility for the disappearance of Khashoggi, how self-defeating this strategy is for the Saudi monarchy as it attempts to reclaim its role as leader of the Arab world and head of the anti-Iran alliance.
The calculated reactions to the Khashoggi case are a painful reminder that the world views the Middle East in purely transactional ways and responds only when a crime is so brazen that it is impossible to look the other way. It is a reminder that if Khashoggi, an elite who enjoyed connections inside and outside high-level Saudi circles, could not protect himself from disappearing in broad daylight on foreign soil, then there is little hope for the budding Arab journalist or civic activist striving for the freedoms that the West continues to hold so dear and shame the Arab world for not having.
Indeed, Khashoggi’s case has caused an international outcry due to the gruesome and brazen nature of the alleged crime and, more importantly, his name recognition and relationships throughout the Arab world and in Washington where he penned columns for the Washington Post. While journalists in Egypt, Syria, Yemen, Morocco, and Gulf countries have been silenced through a variety of means—from losing jobs to being thrown in jail to being forcibly disappeared—the majority do not have the benefit of connections around the world or a diplomatic scandal to bring attention to their plight. Countless others engage in self-censorship whether at home or abroad, fearful of the deadly consequences for themselves and their families.
Ironically, the Khashoggi incident is a reminder that while young Arabs would be lauded if they contributed to their country’s vision for economic and social reform by, for example, launching a startup or making internationally acclaimed films, if they decide to speak out about the repression that suffocates them they will likely face torture in Damascus, jail in Cairo, or a quiet disappearance in corners of the Gulf. In fact, over the past week, warnings came through Saudi state television and social media accounts, with political figures threatening their viewers and followers against “isolating” or insulting Saudi Arabia in light of these “foolish” allegations and “fake news.”
These not so subtle messages aim to instill fear in the hearts and minds of young Arabs, alluding to a fate similar to Khashoggi’s for anyone who crosses the line. Manal Al-Sharif, the Saudi woman who led the effort to advocate for women to drive in the Kingdom, expressed the hopelessness that many in the Arab world felt while watching the Khashoggi case unfold: “I'm thankful that I left the region just in time. If you too can leave with what’s left from your sanity and dignity, please do. Don't fight the system, don't have hopes, don't speak up, don't dream, don't breathe, just leave.”
Two years ago, the Atlantic Council’s Albright-Hadley Middle East Strategy Task Force recommended a new strategic approach to the region that “emphasizes political and economic transformation, and requires profound reforms of states in the region.” The Task Force recognized that this was no easy feat: “These are difficult undertakings requiring strong encouragement from supportive external powers. Yet unless regional states move resolutely toward an updated social contract that empowers citizens and enshrines accountability, the investment being made in the region’s human capital will not bear fruit.”
How can we help unlock the Middle East’s human potential when a dark cloud of repression hangs over the people of the region? Many analysts have tiptoed around Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030, carefully lauding its ambitious economic and social reforms, while arguing that political reform is a secondary necessity. Very few historical examples show that to be the case, and there are also few examples of political change yielding quick economic growth. The post-Arab Spring transitions have shown that change does not come without significant challenges as well as immediate costs for us in the West.
In the short run, a fragile new “democracy” in the Middle East may not be as Western friendly as we would like it to be, but, in the long run, countries that allow their citizens the freedom to express themselves are more likely to yield stability and security for the region and its allies. As long as a cloud of repression keeps journalists from critiquing their governments and activists from holding officials accountable, there will be little hope of winding down the conflicts and unrest in the Middle East, much less unlocking the economic and creative potential of the region.
**Tuqa Nusairat is the deputy director for the Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East. Follow her @tuqanusairat.